hmm. I have played in barely any live tournaments so I don’t have much first hand experience, but here are my thoughts on why cash would Be preferable and more lighthearted for me:That's an interesting perspective. My group strongly prefers tournaments because they are more lighthearted and better atmosphere. Each losing hand costs you equity, but most recreational players don't think in terms of equity. OTOH, every hand lost in a cash game costs you real money.
hmm. I have played in barely any live tournaments so I don’t have much first hand experience, but here are my thoughts on why cash would Be preferable and more lighthearted for me:
1: I would rather play the whole time and come out a small loser than play for 2 hours and lose and be done, even if the upside is to win 4x my buy-in (I will say, this level of intensity for risk/reward does seem fun for every once in a while)
2: somebody here had a good point - in cash you can always have a path back to being in the black, Up to the last few hands of the night you could be in the positive, back from the brink
3. The reason cash games seem more lighthearted to me is that people are expecting to sit down And play/drink/talk for 5 hours, so we’re here for the long haul to have a good time. in Tournaments you pick your spots and capitalize so you don’t get booted
4. You mentioned a tournament where the blinds went up so fast that “there were some flips in there”, whereas in my mind you can play more solid poker theory in the long run with cash as opposed to “the blinds go up so fast, I have to shove with Ace 7 here”
Thoughts?
If you play the whole time (lets call it 5 hours) and are a small loser, you are in the realm of being an average player. A great player may prefer cash, as they will consistently cash up more frequently. In a tournament, an average player cashes just about as often as a good player, but the good payer ladders up higher.1: I would rather play the whole time and come out a small loser than play for 2 hours and lose and be done, even if the upside is to win 4x my buy-in (I will say, this level of intensity for risk/reward does seem fun for every once in a while)
Tournaments and cash play the same way here. "Chip and a chair" is an expression that began in tournament play. If you are down to a single chip in a cash game you are probably reaching into your wallet.2: somebody here had a good point - in cash you can always have a path back to being in the black, Up to the last few hands of the night you could be in the positive, back from the brink
The elimination aspect of a tournament and a no-limit (or pot limit) cash game are the same. The difference is, in the cash game, you can keep playing, as long as you are willing to lose more money. In a limit cash game, I concede the point. Limit is way more casual and you are far less likely to go bust. However, Limit feels like a boring "old man coffee" game to me (as I sit here, eligible for retirement, typing this with a cup of coffee).3. The reason cash games seem more lighthearted to me is that people are expecting to sit down And play/drink/talk for 5 hours, so we’re here for the long haul to have a good time. in Tournaments you pick your spots and capitalize so you don’t get booted
I feel like you just made my point for me. Which is more casual: A flip or studying theory?4. You mentioned a tournament where the blinds went up so fast that “there were some flips in there”, whereas in my mind you can play more solid poker theory in the long run with cash as opposed to “the blinds go up so fast, I have to shove with Ace 7 here”
I disagree. I didn’t want a game of easy decisions - but casual play? laughing? Jokes? Of course. I’m not a pro and I don’t rely on poker to supplement my income. a better question is: why do YOU play poker without expectation for casual laughing and jokes?If you want a game of easy decisions, casual play, laughs, joking with your players, just play Uno. Costs way less to spread and caters to the mindless.
I get that a flip is easier and maybe more casual, but I can still play a cash game with good theory can still be casual with friends.I feel like you just made my point for me. Which is more casual: A flip or studying theory?
Fair enough. If you are playing with good theory and don't have to think about charts/ranges/position (it comes natural) then you would classify as a good player. Good players lean heavily toward cash games, as they tend to be consistently more profitable.I get that a flip is easier and maybe more casual, but I can still play a cash game with good theory can still be casual with friends.
Well, I’m actually not very good. Not a winning player. I think I’m on the way to becoming one, and learning a lot, but the theory in my head is much more solid than my play at the table. I can play solid for 3 hours and lose it all in 10 minutes due to verifiably poor playFair enough. If you are playing with good theory and don't have to think about charts/ranges/position (it comes natural) then you would classify as a good player. Good players lean heavily toward cash games, as they tend to be consistently more profitable.
This topic has come up multiple times over the years. The majority of good players prefer cash.
The OP was looking to mix good players and recreational players. This is the welcome mat for tournament play, as the recreational players will consistently cash in 3-4 games, but the rec will rarely cash in a cash game.
In casinos I play more cash games. At home it's 94.75% tournament play. It keeps the WSOP-level players happy with big cash-outs at the top of the pay table and keeps the drinking players min-cashing for all of eternity. For a game trying to grow with a mix of players, tournaments are the best option.
3. "Friends" - there for the drinks and chatter more than the cards. Usually not great poker players, but usually cheerful and have higher patience. But they tend to not RSVP and don't much care about the game...if something else comes up that they'd rather do, the game is left in the dust.
I feel like I'm looking for a game full of 4s, but have mostly 3s with the occasional 1s who come in, crush, and never return.
I suspect you would use this in a situation where you were trying to get a tournament wrapped up in a shorter amount of time, for whatever reason. Maybe to move on to a cash game afterwards? And if I'm understanding correctly, by equity chop, I'm assuming the amount you win is dependant on the chips each player has left? So if the two are close to 50/50 it's about the same as a regular chop, but if one dominates the other then it's more like a typical first place / second place split? Or otherwise somewhere in between?
And since he says forced - then there is no agreeing to it by the last two players. Organizer of the game has decided in advance that the tournament stops once it is down to two players, and equity is used to determine the amount of the payouts. I can see that it has some advantages, but I'm like you @legonick I prefer to Play it out.
Ayo, how are you finding all these threads to necro?are you set on STT? Cash games Are probably more lighthearted and better atmosphere. Plus everyone can theoretically be a small winner/loser as opposed to needing to be in the top 20% to get paid. Also, the timing is looser, If you need to show up later or leave earlier. You might get more people to bite on playing if its cash
that’s my 2 cents. But my group never does tournaments.
Cash over tournament all the way, for all the reasons given by @AuburnSeth I do enjoy an occasional tournament, but for the most part, if I'm going to play poker for an evening, I want to play until the game ends, or until I decide I'm ready to leave. Who knows when I might get knocked out of a tournament? What fun is that. I dedicate a night to playing and am forced to quit before it's over!
I know a guy who lives nearby and hosts a game twice a month. His group only plays tournament. I'll go once in a while, but if he were hosting a cash game, I'd be there almost every time. Instead I drive 45 minutes 3-4 times a months to play with other guys who play mostly cash. I'd play cash 2-3 times a week if I could find the games. I have no interest in playing tournament more than once or twice a month.
This thread is old AF, but I wanted to say hi to @Nine_high since he is local (to me). What branch of service?
I got addicted to a video game and shut down the home game for a while. I do need to get it started back up, and would have a few people return for sure, but I feel a bit overwhelmed at trying to recruit a bunch of people again...it burns you out. Also I'm way behind on house stuff at the moment...so many projects to get done. But isn't that always how it is with house stuff?@legonick - where are you at? What did you do and how is your game?
Honestly, not a bad idea. I used to play "competitive Uno" in college...mostly just guys drinking and having fun, and luck.If you want a game of easy decisions, casual play, laughs, joking with your players, just play Uno. Costs way less to spread and caters to the mindless.
Totally agree. Took me a while, but I got my game going again and really enjoy it- all about the camaraderie… whether limit or Uno.I feel a bit overwhelmed at trying to recruit a bunch of people again...it burns you out.